Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight Information Region (FIR) (OAKX), 55500-55507 [2024-14708]
Download as PDF
55500
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
SPENO, MA
GLYDE, MA
Boston, MA (BOS)
FIX
FIX
VOR/DME
(Lat. 42°16′48.55″ N, long. 072°09′14.70″ W)
(Lat. 42°16′03.84″ N, long. 071°48′42.76″ W)
(Lat. 42°21′26.82″ N, long. 070°59′22.37″ W)
*
*
*
*
T–634 VIBRU, NY to Sandy Point, RI (SEY) [Amended]
VIBRU, NY
WP
(Lat. 44°20′21.30″
Watertown, NY (ART)
VORTAC
(Lat. 43°57′07.67″
Syracuse, NY (SYR)
VORTAC
(Lat. 43°09′37.87″
STODA, NY
FIX
(Lat. 43°07′00.20″
RAHKS, NY
FIX
(Lat. 42°27′59.28″
WP
(Lat. 42°10′41.86″
DANZI, NY
WEETS, NY
FIX
(Lat. 41°51′26.98″
Kingston, NY (IGN)
VOR/DME
(Lat. 41°39′55.63″
CASSH, NY
FIX
(Lat. 41°35′38.16″
Carmel, NY (CMK)
VOR/DME
(Lat. 41°16′48.32″
CREAM, NY
FIX
(Lat. 41°08′55.85″
Sandy Point, RI (SEY)
VOR/DME
(Lat. 41°10′02.77″
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 25,
2024.
Frank Lias,
Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2024–14345 Filed 7–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. FAA–2023–1415; Amdt. No. 91–
369A]
RIN 2120–AL99
Prohibition Against Certain Flights in
the Kabul Flight Information Region
(FIR) (OAKX)
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) is issuing this
final rule to permit all: U.S. air carriers;
U.S. commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of an airman
certificate issued by the FAA, except
when such persons are operating U.S.registered aircraft for a foreign air
carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except when the operator
of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier,
to operate transiting overflights of the
Kabul Flight Information Region (FIR)
(OAKX) on jet routes P500–G500 at
altitudes at and above Flight Level (FL)
300, subject to the approval of, and in
accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan. The FAA
became aware that certain U.S.
operators were having difficulty using
jet routes P500–G500 in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL320
due to aircraft performance issues under
certain meteorological conditions. After
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
*
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
076°01′19.96″
076°03′52.66″
076°12′16.41″
075°51′21.23″
075°14′21.68″
074°57′24.19″
074°11′51.51″
073°49′20.06″
073°42′17.07″
073°34′52.78″
072°31′18.32″
071°34′33.91″
consideration of Afghanistan’s practice
of publishing Notices to Air Missions
(NOTAMs) regarding overflights on
these jet routes, the lack of any reported
security incidents posing safety-of-flight
risks to civil aircraft overflights on these
jet routes since the FAA issued this
Special Federal Aviation Regulation
(SFAR) in July 2023 or while the FAA
flight prohibition NOTAM that
preceded it was in effect, and the very
brief period of time U.S. civil aviation
overflights on these jet routes would be
in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), the FAA has
determined transiting U.S. civil aviation
overflights operating on jet routes P500–
G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at and above FL300 present a
low risk. The FAA continues to prohibit
U.S. civil aviation operations in the
remainder of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes below FL320 due to hazards to
persons and aircraft engaged in
operations at those altitudes due to the
risk posed by violent extremist and
militant activity and the lack of
adequate risk mitigation capabilities to
counter such activity.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July
5, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill
Petrak, Flight Standards Service,
through the Washington Operations
Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267–3203; email 9-FAAOverseasFlightProhibitions@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
This action amends Special Federal
Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 119, 14
CFR 91.1619, to permit U.S. civil
aviation airmen and operators to
conduct transiting overflights of the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) on jet routes P500–
G500 at altitudes at and above FL300,
subject to the approval of, and in
accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
On July 25, 2023, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) published a final
rule in the Federal Register to prohibit
certain flight operations in the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below FL320 by
all: U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial
operators; persons exercising the
privileges of an airman certificate issued
by the FAA, except when such persons
are operating U.S.-registered aircraft for
a foreign air carrier; and operators of
U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except
when the operator of such aircraft is a
foreign air carrier. In that final rule, the
FAA determined that U.S. civil aviation
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at and above FL320 could
resume due to diminished risks to U.S.
civil aviation operations at those
altitudes.
Subsequently, the FAA became aware
that certain U.S. operators were having
difficulty using jet routes P500–G500 in
the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at
and above FL320 due to aircraft
performance issues under certain
meteorological conditions. After
consideration of Afghanistan’s practice
of publishing NOTAMs regarding
overflights on these jet routes, the lack
of any reported security incidents
posing safety-of-flight risks to civil
aircraft overflights on these jet routes
since the FAA issued SFAR No. 119, 14
CFR 91.1619, in July 2023 or while the
FAA flight prohibition NOTAM that
preceded it was in effect, and the very
brief period of time U.S. civil aviation
overflights on these jet routes, on which
the minimum en route altitude is FL300,
would be in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), the
FAA assesses the risk to the safety of
transiting U.S. civil aviation overflights
operating on jet routes P500–G500 in
the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at
and above FL300 is low. Under the FAA
flight prohibition NOTAM preceding
the July 2023 final rule, the FAA had
previously permitted U.S. civil aviation
to conduct transiting overflight
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on
jet routes P500–G500. The FAA
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
continues to prohibit U.S. civil aviation
operations in the remainder of the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below FL320
due to hazards to persons and aircraft
engaged in operations at those altitudes
due to the risk posed by violent
extremist and militant activity and the
lack of adequate risk mitigation
capabilities to counter such activity.
Therefore, the FAA is issuing this
final rule to permit U.S. civil aviation to
operate transiting overflights of the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) on jet routes P500–
G500 at altitudes at and above FL300,
subject to the approval of, and in
accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
II. Authority and Good Cause
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
A. Authority
The FAA is responsible for the safety
of flight in the U.S. and for the safety
of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated
airmen throughout the world. Sections
106(f) and (g) of title 49, U.S. Code
(U.S.C.), subtitle I, establish the FAA
Administrator’s authority to issue rules
on aviation safety. Subtitle VII of title
49, Aviation Programs, describes in
more detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides
that the Administrator shall consider in
the public interest, among other matters,
assigning, maintaining, and enhancing
safety and security as the highest
priorities in air commerce. Section
40105(b)(1)(A) requires the
Administrator to exercise this authority
consistently with the obligations of the
U.S. Government under international
agreements.
The FAA is promulgating this rule
under the authority described in 49
U.S.C. 44701, General requirements.
Under that section, the FAA is charged
broadly with promoting safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce by
prescribing, among other things,
regulations and minimum standards for
practices, methods, and procedures that
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce and national
security. This regulation is within the
scope of the FAA’s authority because it
provides relief to U.S. civil aviation
operators and airmen conducting
transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) on jet routes P500–G500,
permitting those persons to operate at
altitudes at and above FL300, instead of
at altitudes at and above FL320, as is
required for operations conducted in the
rest of the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(B) of title 5, U.S. Code,
authorizes agencies to dispense with
notice and comment procedures for
rules when the agency for ‘‘good cause’’
finds that those procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Also, section
553(d) permits agencies, upon a finding
of good cause, to issue rules with an
effective date less than 30 days from the
date of publication. In this instance, the
FAA finds good cause to forgo notice
and comment and the delayed effective
date because they would be
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest.
Providing notice and the opportunity
for the public to comment here would
be impracticable. The FAA’s flight
prohibitions, and any amendments
thereto, need to include appropriate
boundaries that reflect the agency’s
current understanding of the risk
environment for U.S. civil aviation. This
allows the FAA to protect the safety of
U.S. operators’ aircraft and the lives of
their passengers and crews without
over-restricting or under-restricting U.S.
operators’ routing options. However, the
risk environment for U.S. civil aviation
in airspace managed by other countries
with respect to safety of flight is fluid
in circumstances involving fighting,
violent extremist and militant activity,
or periods of heightened tensions,
particularly where weapons capable of
targeting or otherwise negatively
affecting U.S. civil aviation are or may
be present. This fluidity, and the
potential for rapid changes in the risks
to U.S. civil aviation, significantly limits
how far in advance of a new or amended
flight prohibition the FAA can usefully
assess the risk environment. The delay
that would be occasioned by providing
an opportunity to comment on this
action would significantly increase the
risk that the resulting final action would
not accurately reflect the current risks to
U.S. civil aviation associated with the
situation and thus would not establish
boundaries for the flight prohibition
commensurate with those risks.
While the FAA sought and responded
to public comments, the boundaries of
the area in which unacceptable risks to
the safety of U.S. civil aviation existed
might change due to: evolving military
or political circumstances; violent
extremist and militant group activity;
the introduction, removal, or
repositioning of more advanced antiaircraft weapon systems; or other
factors. As a result, if the situation
improved while the FAA sought and
responded to public comments, the rule
the FAA finalized might be over-
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55501
restrictive, unnecessarily limiting U.S.
operators’ routing options and
potentially causing them to incur
unnecessary additional fuel and
operations-related costs, as well as
potentially causing passengers to incur
unnecessarily some costs attributed to
their time. Conversely, if the situation
deteriorated while the FAA sought and
responded to public comments, the rule
the FAA finalized might be underrestrictive, allowing U.S. civil aviation
to continue operating in areas where
unacceptable risks to their safety had
developed. Such an outcome would
endanger the safety of these aircraft, as
well as their passengers and crews,
exposing them to unacceptable risks of
death, injury, and property damage that
could occur if a U.S. operator’s aircraft
were shot down (or otherwise damaged)
while operating in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX).
Alternatively, if the FAA made
changes to the area in which U.S. civil
aviation operations would be prohibited
between a notice of proposed
rulemaking and a final rule due to
changed conditions, the version of the
rule the public commented on would no
longer reflect the FAA’s current
assessment of the risk environment for
U.S. civil aviation.
In addition, seeking comment would
be contrary to the public interest
because some of the rational basis for
the rulemaking is based upon classified
information and controlled unclassified
information not authorized for public
release. In order to meaningfully
provide comment on a proposal, the
public would need access to the basis
for the agency’s decision-making, which
the FAA cannot provide. Disclosing
classified or controlled unclassified
information in order to seek meaningful
comment on the proposal would harm
the public interest. Accordingly, the
FAA meaningfully seeking comment on
the proposal is contrary to the public
interest.
Therefore, providing notice and the
opportunity for comment would be
impracticable as it would hinder the
FAA’s ability to maintain appropriate
flight prohibitions based on up-to-date
assessments of the risks to the safety of
U.S. civil aviation operations in airspace
managed by other countries and
contrary to the public interest as the
FAA cannot protect classified and
controlled unclassified information and
meaningfully seek public comment.
For the same reasons discussed above,
the potential safety impacts and the
need for prompt action on up-to-date
information that is not public would
make delaying the effective date
impracticable and contrary to the public
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
55502
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
interest. Additionally, for transiting
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on
jet routes P500–G500 at altitudes at and
above FL300, any delay in the effective
date of the rule would continue a
prohibition on U.S. civil aviation
operations on these jet routes at
altitudes at and above FL300 that the
FAA has determined is no longer
needed for the safety of U.S. civil
aviation and would thus unnecessarily
restrict U.S. operators’ routing options
at those altitudes on those jet routes.
Accordingly, the FAA finds good
cause exists to forgo notice and
comment and any delay in the effective
date for this rule.
III. Background and Discussion of the
Final Rule
On August 30, 2021, the FAA issued
NOTAM KICZ A0029/21 to address the
then-existing unacceptable risks to the
safety of U.S. civil aviation operations
in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at all altitudes,
except for transiting overflight
operations on jet routes P500–G500.
This NOTAM prohibited, with certain
limited exceptions, U.S. civil aviation
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
all altitudes by all: U.S. air carriers; U.S.
commercial operators; persons
exercising the privileges of an airman
certificate issued by the FAA, except
when such persons are operating U.S.registered aircraft for a foreign air
carrier; and all operators of U.S.registered civil aircraft, except when the
operator of such aircraft is a foreign air
carrier, due to the risk posed by violent
extremist and militant activity, lack of
adequate risk mitigation capabilities,
and disruption to air traffic services.
The NOTAM allowed U.S. civil aviation
overflights to transit the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) on jet routes P500–G500, as
such operations are only in the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) very briefly.
Following the Taliban takeover of
Afghanistan, the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) AsiaPacific Office made contact with
Afghanistan’s civil aviation authority
and stood up a contingency
coordination team (CCT) composed of
Afghanistan and neighboring air
navigation service providers, as well as
International Air Transport Association
(IATA) representation. Afghanistan’s
civil aviation authority and the CCT
worked with neighboring air navigation
service providers to establish a
contingency plan for the safe
resumption of civil overflights in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX).
Subsequently, Afghanistan issued a
series of NOTAMs delineating overflight
procedures and established altitude
blocks for specific categories of flight
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
operations across various regions. The
overflight procedures rely upon
internationally-recognized traffic
information broadcasts by aircraft
(TIBA) procedures, which pilots use in
areas around the world where air traffic
services are very limited or unavailable
to maintain safe separation between
aircraft. Consequently, the FAA
determined that U.S. civil aviation
operations throughout the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) could resume at altitudes at and
above FL320 due to diminished risks to
U.S. civil aviation operations at those
altitudes. On July 25, 2023, the FAA
published in the Federal Register a final
rule, Prohibition Against Certain Flights
in the Kabul Flight Information Region
(FIR) (OAKX), allowing U.S. civil
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) to
resume at altitudes at and above FL320.1
However, as described in more detail in
the preamble to the July 2023 final rule,
the FAA continued to assess the
situation in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes below FL320 as being
hazardous for U.S. civil aviation and
prohibited U.S. civil aviation operations
at those altitudes.
Although the FAA did not identify or
assess that there existed any increased
safety-of-flight risks to transiting U.S.
civil aviation overflights operating on jet
routes P500–G500 due to violent
extremist or militant activity, the FAA
prohibited operations on those routes at
altitudes below FL320 in the July 2023
final rule because the Kabul FIR Air
Traffic Management Contingency Plan
indicates that, as necessary, FL300 may
be reserved for military operations by
NOTAM. Consequently, the FAA
decided to establish a minimum
allowed overflight level of FL320 for
U.S. civil aviation operations in the
entirety of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) to
help ensure aircraft separation between
any military operations being conducted
in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at FL300 and
U.S. civil aviation overflights.
Since it issued the July 2023 final
rule, the FAA has received two petitions
for exemption from SFAR No. 119,
§ 91.1619, from U.S. air carriers
requesting to operate on jet routes P500–
G500 at altitudes at and above FL300
instead of at altitudes at and above
FL320 as required by SFAR No. 119,
§ 91.1619, due to aircraft performance
1 Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Kabul
Flight Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) final rule,
88 FR 47765 (Jul. 25, 2023). The FAA had
prohibited U.S. civil flight operations at all
altitudes in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) in NOTAM KICZ
A0029/21, except for transiting overflights on jet
routes P500–G500. With the publication of the July
2023 final rule, the FAA rescinded NOTAM KICZ
A0029/21.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
issues under certain meteorological
conditions.2 3
Since the publication of the Kabul FIR
Air Traffic Management Contingency
Plan and continuing since the FAA
issued the July 2023 final rule,
Afghanistan has issued a series of
NOTAMs permitting overflight
operations between waypoints FIRUZ
and MOTMO on jet routes P500–G500 at
altitudes between FL300–FL510. The
FAA is not aware of any safety or
security incidents experienced by civil
aircraft operating on jet routes P500–
G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at or above FL300 due to
military flight operations while FAA
NOTAM KICZ A0029/21, which
permitted U.S. civil aviation operations
on that route, was in effect or since the
July 2023 final rule. In addition, the
FAA is not aware of any active threats
to U.S. civil aviation operations on jet
routes P500–G500 in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) from violent extremist and
militant activity and is not aware of any
reports of security incidents involving
violent extremist and militant activity
posing safety-of-flight risks to civil
aircraft overflights using these jet routes
at altitudes at or above FL300 in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX), either while FAA
NOTAM KICZ A0029/21 was in effect or
since the issuance of the July 2023 final
rule. The very limited flight time in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) minimizes both
potential exposure to any military
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) that
might be operating at FL300 and to
potential opportunistic threats should a
violent extremist observe or hear an
overflying aircraft. Specifically, the
flight distance between waypoints
FIRUZ and MOTMO on jet routes P500–
G500 is approximately 12 nautical
miles, which takes approximately 95
seconds at cruising speeds.
Consequently, the FAA has
determined that U.S. civil aviation
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at and above FL300 on jet
routes P500–G500 present a low risk.
Although violent extremists and
militants have access to weapons posing
risks up to 25,000 feet, and there is high
terrain in the vicinity of jet routes P500–
G500, the FAA did not see such
weapons used against civil aviation
overflights on these jet routes during
approximately 20 years of U.S. military
presence in Afghanistan or since the
coalition withdrawal in August of 2021.
Therefore, consistent with the
foregoing, the FAA is amending SFAR
No. 119, § 91.1619, to permit U.S. civil
2 American
3 United
Airlines, docket FAA–2023–1985.
Parcel Service, Co., docket FAA–2023–
2065.
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
aviation to conduct transiting
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on
jet routes P500–G500 at altitudes at and
above FL300, subject to the approval of,
and in accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
However, this final rule continues to
prohibit U.S. civil flight operations at
altitudes below FL320 throughout the
rest of the Kabul FIR (OAKX). Violent
extremist and militant activities
continue to pose safety-of-flight risks to
U.S. civil aviation at altitudes below
FL320 throughout the rest of
Afghanistan. Violent extremists and
militants are primarily armed with
small arms, crew-served weapons, and
field rockets and may have access to
legacy man-portable air defense systems
(MANPADS). Some MANPADS may be
capable of reaching a maximum altitude
of up to 25,000 feet above ground level;
however, in the context of Afghanistan,
the FAA must also account for the high
altitude of some of the country’s terrain.
Allowing U.S. civil aviation operations
in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) only at
altitudes at or above FL320, other than
on jet routes P500–G500, accounts for
risks associated with the capabilities of
weapons systems potentially available
to violent extremist organizations and
the terrain under other established
international air routes in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX).4
Further amendments to SFAR No.
119, § 91.1619, might be appropriate if
the risk to U.S. civil aviation safety and
security changes. In this regard, the
FAA will continue to monitor the
situation and evaluate the extent to
which persons described in paragraph
(a) of this rule might be able to operate
safely in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
The FAA also republishes the details
concerning the approval and exemption
processes in sections V and VI of this
preamble, consistent with other recently
published flight prohibition SFARs to
enable interested persons to refer to this
final rule for comprehensive
information about requesting relief from
the FAA from the provisions of SFAR
No. 119, § 91.1619.
4 As defined in 14 CFR 1.1, ‘‘Flight level means
a level of constant atmospheric pressure related to
a reference datum of 29.92 inches of mercury.’’
Flight level, in this context, is differentiated from
above-ground-level (AGL), which is altitude
expressed in feet measured above ground level.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
V. Approval Process Based on a
Request From a Department, Agency, or
Instrumentality of the United States
Government
A. Approval Process Based on an
Authorization Request From a
Department, Agency, or Instrumentality
of the United States Government
In some instances, U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities may need to engage
U.S. civil aviation to support their
activities in the Kabul FIR (OAKX). If a
department, agency, or instrumentality
of the U.S. Government determines that
it has a critical need to engage any
person described in paragraph (a) of
SFAR No. 119, § 91.1619, including a
U.S. air carrier or commercial operator,
to transport civilian or military
passengers or cargo or conduct other
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX),
except for transiting overflights on jet
routes P500–G500 at altitudes at and
above FL300, that department, agency,
or instrumentality may request the FAA
to approve persons described in
paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 119,
§ 91.1619, to conduct such operations.
The requesting U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality
must submit the request for approval to
the FAA’s Associate Administrator for
Aviation Safety in a letter signed by an
appropriate senior official of the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality.5 The FAA will not
accept or consider requests for approval
from anyone other than the requesting
U.S. Government department, agency, or
instrumentality. In addition, the senior
official signing the letter requesting
FAA approval must be sufficiently
positioned within the requesting
department, agency, or instrumentality
to demonstrate that the organization’s
senior leadership supports the request
for approval and is committed to taking
all necessary steps to minimize aviation
safety and security risks to the proposed
flights. The senior official must also be
in a position to: (1) attest to the accuracy
of all representations made to the FAA
in the request for approval, and (2)
ensure that any support from the
requesting U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality
described in the request for approval is
in fact brought to bear and is maintained
5 This approval procedure applies to U.S.
Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities; it does not apply to the public.
The FAA describes this procedure in the interest of
providing transparency with respect to the FAA’s
process for interacting with U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or instrumentalities that
seek to engage U.S. civil aviation to operate in the
area in which this SFAR would prohibit their
operations in the absence of specific FAA approval.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55503
over time. Unless justified by exigent
circumstances, requesting U.S.
Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities must submit requests
for approval to the FAA no less than 30
calendar days before the date on which
the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality wishes the operator(s) to
commence the proposed operation(s).
The requestor must send the request
to the Associate Administrator for
Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
Electronic submissions are acceptable,
and the requesting entity may request
that the FAA notify it electronically as
to whether the FAA grants the request
for approval. If a requestor wishes to
make an electronic submission to the
FAA, the requestor should contact the
Washington Operations Center by
telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email
at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@
faa.gov for submission instructions. The
requestor must not submit its letter
requesting FAA approval or related
supporting documentation to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operations Center will
refer the requestor to an appropriate
staff member of the Flight Standards
Service for further assistance.
A single letter may request approval
from the FAA for multiple persons
described in SFAR No. 119, § 91.1619,
or for multiple flight operations. To the
extent known, the letter must identify
the person(s) the requester expects the
SFAR to cover on whose behalf the U.S.
Government department, agency, or
instrumentality seeks FAA approval,
and it must describe—
• The proposed operation(s),
including the nature of the mission
being supported;
• The service the person(s) covered
by the SFAR will provide;
• To the extent known, the specific
locations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX)
where the proposed operation(s) will
occur, including, but not limited to, the
flight path and altitude of the aircraft
while it is operating in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) and the airports, airfields, or
landing zones at which the aircraft will
take off and land; and
• The method by which the
requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality will provide, or how the
operator will otherwise obtain, current
threat information and an explanation of
how the operator will integrate this
information into all phases of the
proposed operations (i.e., the premission planning and briefing, in-flight,
and post-flight phases).
The request for approval must also
include a list of operators with whom
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
55504
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the U.S. Government department,
agency, or instrumentality requesting
FAA approval has a current contract(s),
grant(s), or cooperative agreement(s) (or
its prime contractor has a
subcontract(s)) for specific flight
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX),
except for operations in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) limited to transiting overflights
on jet routes P500–G500 at altitudes at
and above FL300. The requestor may
identify additional operators to the FAA
at any time after the FAA issues its
approval. Neither the operators listed in
the original request, nor any operators
the requestor subsequently seeks to add
to the approval, may commence
operations under the approval until the
FAA issues them an Operations
Specification (OpSpec) or Letter of
Authorization (LOA), as appropriate, for
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes below FL320 and/or at
altitudes below FL300 on jet routes
P500–G500, as applicable. The approval
conditions discussed below apply to all
operators. Requestors should contact the
Washington Operations Center by
telephone at (202) 267–3203 or by email
at 9-FAA-OverseasFlightProhibitions@
faa.gov for instructions on how to
submit the names of additional
operators the requestor wishes to add to
an existing approval to the FAA. The
requestor must not submit the names of
additional operators it wishes to add to
an existing approval to the Washington
Operations Center. Rather, the
Washington Operations Center will refer
the requestor to an appropriate staff
member of the Flight Standards Service
for further assistance.
If an approval request includes
classified information or controlled
unclassified information not authorized
for public release, requestors may
contact the Washington Operations
Center for instructions on submitting it
to the FAA. The Washington Operations
Center’s contact information appears in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this final rule.
FAA approval of an operation under
SFAR No. 119, § 91.1619, does not
relieve persons subject to this SFAR of
the responsibility to comply with all
other applicable FAA rules and
regulations. Operators of civil aircraft
must comply with the conditions of
their certificates, OpSpecs, and LOAs,
as applicable. Operators must also
comply with all rules and regulations of
other U.S. Government departments,
agencies, or instrumentalities that may
apply to the proposed operation(s),
including, but not limited to,
regulations issued by the Transportation
Security Administration.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
B. Approval Conditions
If the FAA approves the request, the
FAA’s Aviation Safety organization will
send an approval letter to the requesting
U.S. Government department, agency, or
instrumentality informing it that the
FAA’s approval is subject to all of the
following conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those
procedures and conditions that limit, to
the greatest degree possible, the risk to
the operator while still allowing the
operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) Before any approval takes effect,
the operator must submit to the FAA:
(a) A written release of the U.S.
Government from all damages, claims,
and liabilities, including without
limitation legal fees and expenses,
relating to any event arising out of or
related to the approved operations in
the Kabul FIR (OAKX); and
(b) The operator’s written agreement
to indemnify the U.S. Government with
respect to any and all third-party
damages, claims, and liabilities,
including without limitation legal fees
and expenses, relating to any event
arising out of or related to the approved
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
(3) Other conditions the FAA may
specify, including those the FAA might
impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as
applicable.
The release and agreement to
indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable
non-premium war risk insurance policy
the FAA issues under chapter 443 of
title 49, U.S. Code.
If the FAA approves the proposed
operation(s), the FAA will issue an
OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the
operator(s) identified in the original
request and any operators the requestor
subsequently adds to the approval,
authorizing them to conduct the
approved operation(s). In addition, as
stated in paragraph (3) of this section
V.B., the FAA notes that it may include
additional conditions beyond those
contained in the approval letter in any
OpSpec or LOA associated with a
particular operator operating under this
approval, as necessary in the interests of
aviation safety. U.S. Government
departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities requesting FAA
approval on behalf of entities with
which they have a contract or
subcontract, grant, or cooperative
agreement should request a copy of the
relevant OpSpec or LOA directly from
the entity with which they have any of
the foregoing types of arrangements, if
desired.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
VI. Information Regarding Petitions for
Exemption
Any operations not conducted under
an approval the FAA issues through the
approval process set forth previously
may only occur in accordance with an
exemption from SFAR No. 119,
§ 91.1619. A petition for exemption
must comply with 14 CFR part 11. The
FAA will consider whether exceptional
circumstances exist beyond those
described in the approval process in the
previous section. To determine whether
a petition for exemption from the
prohibition this SFAR establishes
fulfills the standards described in 14
CFR 11.81, the FAA consistently finds
necessary the following information:
• The proposed operation(s),
including the nature of the operation;
• The service the person(s) covered
by the SFAR will provide;
• The specific locations in the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) where the proposed
operation(s) will occur, including, but
not limited to, the flight path and
altitude of the aircraft while it is
operating in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) and
the airports, airfields, or landing zones
at which the aircraft will take off and
land;
• The method by which the operator
will obtain current threat information
and an explanation of how the operator
will integrate this information into all
phases of its proposed operations (i.e.,
the pre-mission planning and briefing,
in-flight, and post-flight phases); and
• The plans and procedures the
operator will use to minimize the risks
identified in this preamble to the
proposed operations, to support the
relief sought, and demonstrate that
granting such relief would not adversely
affect safety or would provide a level of
safety at least equal to that provided by
this SFAR. The FAA has found
comprehensive, organized plans and
procedures of this nature to be helpful
in facilitating the agency’s safety
evaluation of petitions for exemption
from flight prohibition SFARs.
The FAA includes, as a condition of
each such exemption it issues, a release
and agreement to indemnify, as
described previously.
The FAA recognizes that, with the
support of the U.S. Government, the
governments of other countries could
plan operations that may be affected by
SFAR No. 119, § 91.1619. While the
FAA will not permit these operations
through the approval process, the FAA
will consider exemption requests for
such operations on an expedited basis
and in accordance with the order of
preference set forth in paragraph (c) of
SFAR No. 119, § 91.1619.
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
If a petition for exemption includes
information that is sensitive for security
reasons or proprietary information,
requestors may contact the Washington
Operations Center for instructions on
submitting it to the FAA. The
Washington Operations Center’s contact
information is listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
final rule. Requestors must not submit
their petitions for exemption or related
supporting documentation to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operations Center will
refer the requestor to the appropriate
staff member of the Air Transportation
Division, Flight Standards Service, or
the Office of Rulemaking for further
assistance.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
VII. Severability
Congress authorized the FAA by
statute to promote safe flight of civil
aircraft in air commerce by prescribing,
among other things, regulations and
minimum standards for practices,
methods, and procedures the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce and national security.
49 U.S.C. 44701. Consistent with that
mandate, the FAA is prohibiting certain
persons from conducting flight
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX)
below certain altitudes due to the
continuing hazards to the safety of U.S.
civil flight operations at those altitudes.
The purpose of this rule is to operate
holistically in addressing a range of
hazards and needs in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX). However, the FAA recognizes
that certain provisions focus on unique
factors. Therefore, the FAA finds that
the various provisions of this final rule
are severable and able to operate
functionally if severed from each other.
In the event a court were to invalidate
one or more of this final rule’s unique
provisions, the remaining provisions
should stand, thus allowing the FAA to
continue to fulfill its Congressionally
authorized role of promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce.
VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of
regulatory actions under a variety of
Executive orders and other
requirements. First, Executive Orders
12866 and 13563, as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (‘‘Modernizing
Regulatory Review’’), direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs.
Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act
of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354), as codified in
5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires agencies to
analyze the economic impact of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Trade Agreements Act of
1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as codified in 19
U.S.C. chapter 13, prohibits agencies
from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade
Agreements Act requires agencies to
consider international standards and,
where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. chapter
25, requires agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits,
and other effects of proposed or final
rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by
State, local, or Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995).
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this final rule.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA
has determined this final rule has
benefits that justify its costs. This rule
is a significant regulatory action, as
defined in section 3(f)(4) of Executive
Order 12866 as amended by Executive
Order 14094. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not
require notice and comment for this
final rule, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do not
require regulatory flexibility analyses
regarding impacts on small entities.
This rule will not create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. This rule will not impose
an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments, or on the private
sector, by exceeding the threshold
identified previously.
A. Regulatory Evaluation
This rule continues to prohibit U.S.
civil flights in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes below FL320, except for
transiting overflights on jet routes P500–
G500, due to the significant hazards to
U.S. civil aviation described in this
preamble. The alternative flight routes
result in some additional fuel and
operations costs to the affected
operators, as well as some costs
attributed to passenger time. However,
this amendment of the SFAR provides
relief to U.S. civil operators and airmen
wishing to conduct transiting overflight
operations on jet routes P500–G500 at
altitudes at and above FL300, instead of
requiring them to operate at altitudes at
and above FL320, as the SFAR
previously did.
For the reasons described in the
Background and Discussion of the Final
Rule section of this preamble, the FAA
has determined that U.S. civil aviation
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55505
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at and above FL300 on jet
routes P500–G500 present a low risk
and that U.S. operators and airmen may
conduct such flights. However, as
described in more detail in the
Background and Discussion of the Final
Rule section of this preamble, the FAA
has also determined that U.S. civil
aviation operations in the remainder of
the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes
below FL320 continue to pose
unacceptable risks to the safety of U.S.
civil aviation due to the risks to such
operations posed by violent extremist
and militant activity and the lack of
adequate risk mitigation capabilities to
counter such activity. The rule allows
for a lower minimum flight level of
FL300 on jet routes P500–G500,
providing relief and reducing the cost
for overflights transiting P500–G500
while continuing to prohibit unsafe
flights in the remainder of the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) at altitudes below FL320.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires an agency to
prepare an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis describing impacts on small
entities whenever 5 U.S.C. 553 or any
other law requires an agency to publish
a general notice of proposed rulemaking
for any proposed rule. Similarly, 5
U.S.C. 604 requires an agency to prepare
a final regulatory flexibility analysis
when an agency issues a final rule
under 5 U.S.C. 553 after that section or
any other law requires publication of a
general notice of proposed rulemaking.
The FAA concludes good cause exists to
forgo notice and comment and to not
delay the effective date for this rule. As
5 U.S.C. 553 does not require notice and
comment in this situation, 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604 similarly do not require
regulatory flexibility analyses.
C. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or
engaging in related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States.
Pursuant to this Act, the establishment
of standards is not considered an
unnecessary obstacle to the foreign
commerce of the United States, so long
as the standard has a legitimate
domestic objective, such as the
protection of safety, and does not
operate in a manner that excludes
imports that meet this objective. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
55506
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards.
The FAA has assessed the potential
effect of this final rule and determined
that its purpose is to protect the safety
of U.S. civil aviation from risks to their
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), a
location outside the U.S. Therefore, the
rule complies with the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4)
requires each Federal agency to prepare
a written statement assessing the effects
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
final agency rule that may result in an
expenditure of $100 million or more (in
1995 dollars) in any one year by State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector; such
a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $183
million in lieu of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such
a mandate. Therefore, the requirements
of title II of the Act do not apply.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires the FAA to
consider the impact of paperwork and
other information collection burdens it
imposes on the public. The FAA has
determined no new requirement for
information collection is associated
with this final rule.
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, the FAA’s policy is to
conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has determined no ICAO Standards and
Recommended Practices correspond to
this regulation. The FAA finds this
action is fully consistent with the
obligations under 49 U.S.C.
40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure the FAA
exercises its duties consistently with the
obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
While the FAA’s flight prohibition
does not apply to foreign air carriers,
DOT codeshare authorizations prohibit
foreign air carriers from carrying a U.S.
codeshare partner’s code on a flight
segment that operates in airspace for
which the FAA has issued a flight
prohibition for U.S. civil aviation. In
addition, foreign air carriers and other
foreign operators may choose to avoid,
or be advised or directed by their civil
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
aviation authorities to avoid, airspace
for which the FAA has issued a flight
prohibition for U.S. civil aviation.
G. Environmental Analysis
The FAA has analyzed this action
under Executive Order 12114,
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major
Federal Actions, and DOT Order
5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order
12114 requires the FAA to be informed
of environmental considerations and
take those considerations into account
when making decisions on major
Federal actions that could have
environmental impacts anywhere
beyond the borders of the United States.
The FAA has determined this action is
exempt pursuant to section 2–5(a)(i) of
Executive Order 12114 because it does
not have the potential for a significant
effect on the environment outside the
United States.
In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8–
6(c), the FAA has prepared a
memorandum for the record stating the
reason(s) for this determination and has
placed it in the docket for this
rulemaking.
IX. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under
the principles and criteria of Executive
Order 13132. The agency has
determined this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, or
the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, this
rule will not have federalism
implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211. The agency has
determined it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under the Executive
order and will not be likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation
Executive Order 13609 promotes
international regulatory cooperation to
meet shared challenges involving
health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to
reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed
this action under the policies and
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
agency responsibilities of Executive
Order 13609 and has determined that
this action will have no effect on
international regulatory cooperation.
X. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access
Except for classified and controlled
unclassified material not authorized for
public release, all documents the FAA
considered in developing this rule,
including economic analyses and
technical reports, may be accessed from
the internet through the docket for this
rulemaking.
Those documents may be viewed
online at https://www.regulations.gov
using the docket number listed above. A
copy of this rule will be placed in the
docket. Electronic retrieval help and
guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. An electronic copy of
this document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register’s
website at https://
www.federalregister.gov and the
Government Publishing Office’s website
at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may
also be found at the FAA’s Regulations
and Policies website at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9677.
B. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121) (set forth as
a note to 5 U.S.C. 601) requires FAA to
comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance
with statutes and regulations within its
jurisdiction. A small entity with
questions regarding this document may
contact its local FAA official or the
persons listed under the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the
beginning of the preamble. To find out
more about SBREFA on the internet,
visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_
policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Afghanistan, Air traffic control,
Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation
safety, Freight.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends chapter I of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, as follows:
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
FLIGHT RULES
1. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101,
40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111,
44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715,
44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316,
46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–
47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114–190, 130 Stat. 615
(49 U.S.C. 44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of
the Convention on International Civil
Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
in support of government-sponsored
activities of a foreign country with the
support of a U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality;
and third, for all other operations.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, under the
authority of 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and (g),
40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5).
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024–14708 Filed 7–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
2. Amend § 91.1619 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
§ 91.1619 Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 119—Prohibition Against
Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
*
Internal Revenue Service
*
*
*
*
(c) Permitted operations. This section
does not prohibit persons described in
paragraph (a) of this section from
conducting flight operations in the
Kabul Flight Information Region (FIR)
(OAKX) under the following
circumstances:
(1) Permitted operations that do not
require an approval or exemption from
the FAA. (i) Overflights of the Kabul
Flight Information Region (FIR) (OAKX)
may be conducted at altitudes at and
above Flight Level (FL) 320, subject to
the approval of, and in accordance with
the conditions established by, the
appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
(ii) Transiting overflights of the Kabul
Flight Information Region (FIR) (OAKX)
may be conducted on jet routes P500–
G500 at altitudes at and above FL300,
subject to the approval of, and in
accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
(2) Operations permitted under an
approval or exemption issued by the
FAA. Flight operations may be
conducted in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) at
altitudes below FL320, provided that
such flight operations occur under a
contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement with a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government
(or under a subcontract between the
prime contractor of the U.S.
Government department, agency, or
instrumentality and the person
described in paragraph (a) of this
section) with the approval of the FAA
or under an exemption issued by the
FAA. The FAA will consider requests
for approval or exemption in a timely
manner, with the order of preference
being: first, for those operations in
support of U.S. Government-sponsored
activities; second, for those operations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Jul 03, 2024
Jkt 262001
26 CFR Parts 40 and 47
[TD 10003]
RIN 1545–BQ93
Excise Tax on Designated Drugs;
Procedural Requirements
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This document contains final
regulations relating to the excise tax
imposed on certain sales by
manufacturers, producers, or importers
of designated drugs. Specifically, the
final regulations set forth procedural
provisions relating to how taxpayers
must report liability for such tax. The
final regulations also except such tax
from semimonthly deposit
requirements. The final regulations
affect manufacturers, producers, or
importers of designated drugs
dispensed, furnished, or administered to
individuals under the terms of Medicare
during certain statutory periods.
DATES:
Effective date: These regulations are
effective on August 5, 2024.
Applicability dates: For dates of
applicability, see §§ 40.0–1(e),
40.6011(a)–1(e), 40.6302(c)–1(f), and
47.5000D–1(b).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jacob W. Peeples or James S. Williford
at (202) 317–6855 (not a toll-free
number).
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This document amends the Excise
Tax Procedural Regulations (26 CFR
part 40) and adds new part 47 to 26 CFR
chapter I to contain the ‘‘Designated
Drugs Excise Tax Regulations’’ related
to the excise tax imposed by section
5000D of the Internal Revenue Code
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55507
(Code) on certain sales by
manufacturers, producers, or importers
of designated drugs (section 5000D tax).
Sections 1191 through 1198 of the
Social Security Act (SSA), added by
sections 11001 and 11002 of Public Law
117–169, 136 Stat. 1818 (August 16,
2022), commonly referred to as the
Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA),
require the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to establish a Medicare
prescription drug price negotiation
program (Medicare Drug Price
Negotiation Program) to negotiate
maximum fair prices for certain high
expenditure, single-source drugs
covered under Medicare.
Section 5000D, added to new chapter
50A of the Code by section 11003 of the
IRA, imposes an excise tax on certain
sales by manufacturers, producers, or
importers of designated drugs
dispensed, furnished, or administered to
individuals under the terms of Medicare
during a day that falls within a period
described in section 5000D(b). The
periods described in section 5000D(b)
relate to certain statutorily prescribed
milestones in the Medicare Drug Price
Negotiation Program. Because chapter
50A is a new chapter of the Code, the
existing regulations that prescribe
procedural rules applicable to most
Federal excise taxes do not apply to
chapter 50A.
Notice 2023–52 (2023–35 I.R.B. 650;
August 28, 2023) announced that the
Department of the Treasury (Treasury
Department) and the IRS intended to
propose regulations addressing
substantive and procedural issues
related to the section 5000D tax.
On October 2, 2023, a notice of
proposed rulemaking (REG–115559–23)
was published in the Federal Register
(88 FR 67690) (proposed regulations).
No public hearing was requested or
held. The Treasury Department and the
IRS received several comments in
response to the proposed regulations.
The comments addressing the proposed
regulations are summarized in the
Summary of Comments and Explanation
of Revisions section of this preamble.
Summary of Comments and
Explanation of Revisions
I. Overview
As noted in the Background section of
this preamble, the Treasury Department
and the IRS received several public
comment submissions in response to the
proposed regulations. The public
comments fall into six general
categories: timing of the publication of
the proposed regulations; the quarterly
filing requirement in the proposed
regulations; the proposed regulations’
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 129 (Friday, July 5, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55500-55507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14708]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
[Docket No. FAA-2023-1415; Amdt. No. 91-369A]
RIN 2120-AL99
Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is issuing this
final rule to permit all: U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial operators;
persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate issued by
the FAA, except when such persons are operating U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered
civil aircraft, except when the operator of such aircraft is a foreign
air carrier, to operate transiting overflights of the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) on jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at
and above Flight Level (FL) 300, subject to the approval of, and in
accordance with the conditions established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan. The FAA became aware that certain U.S.
operators were having difficulty using jet routes P500-G500 in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL320 due to aircraft
performance issues under certain meteorological conditions. After
consideration of Afghanistan's practice of publishing Notices to Air
Missions (NOTAMs) regarding overflights on these jet routes, the lack
of any reported security incidents posing safety-of-flight risks to
civil aircraft overflights on these jet routes since the FAA issued
this Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) in July 2023 or while
the FAA flight prohibition NOTAM that preceded it was in effect, and
the very brief period of time U.S. civil aviation overflights on these
jet routes would be in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), the FAA has determined
transiting U.S. civil aviation overflights operating on jet routes
P500-G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL300
present a low risk. The FAA continues to prohibit U.S. civil aviation
operations in the remainder of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below
FL320 due to hazards to persons and aircraft engaged in operations at
those altitudes due to the risk posed by violent extremist and militant
activity and the lack of adequate risk mitigation capabilities to
counter such activity.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 5, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Petrak, Flight Standards Service,
through the Washington Operations Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267-3203; email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
This action amends Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No.
119, 14 CFR 91.1619, to permit U.S. civil aviation airmen and operators
to conduct transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on jet routes
P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300, subject to the approval of,
and in accordance with the conditions established by, the appropriate
authorities of Afghanistan.
On July 25, 2023, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
published a final rule in the Federal Register to prohibit certain
flight operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below FL320 by
all: U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising
the privileges of an airman certificate issued by the FAA, except when
such persons are operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air
carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when
the operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier. In that final
rule, the FAA determined that U.S. civil aviation overflights of the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL320 could resume due to
diminished risks to U.S. civil aviation operations at those altitudes.
Subsequently, the FAA became aware that certain U.S. operators were
having difficulty using jet routes P500-G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at
altitudes at and above FL320 due to aircraft performance issues under
certain meteorological conditions. After consideration of Afghanistan's
practice of publishing NOTAMs regarding overflights on these jet
routes, the lack of any reported security incidents posing safety-of-
flight risks to civil aircraft overflights on these jet routes since
the FAA issued SFAR No. 119, 14 CFR 91.1619, in July 2023 or while the
FAA flight prohibition NOTAM that preceded it was in effect, and the
very brief period of time U.S. civil aviation overflights on these jet
routes, on which the minimum en route altitude is FL300, would be in
the Kabul FIR (OAKX), the FAA assesses the risk to the safety of
transiting U.S. civil aviation overflights operating on jet routes
P500-G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL300 is
low. Under the FAA flight prohibition NOTAM preceding the July 2023
final rule, the FAA had previously permitted U.S. civil aviation to
conduct transiting overflight operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on jet
routes P500-G500. The FAA
[[Page 55501]]
continues to prohibit U.S. civil aviation operations in the remainder
of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below FL320 due to hazards to
persons and aircraft engaged in operations at those altitudes due to
the risk posed by violent extremist and militant activity and the lack
of adequate risk mitigation capabilities to counter such activity.
Therefore, the FAA is issuing this final rule to permit U.S. civil
aviation to operate transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on
jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300, subject to the
approval of, and in accordance with the conditions established by, the
appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
II. Authority and Good Cause
A. Authority
The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the U.S. and for
the safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-registered civil aircraft, and
U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the world. Sections 106(f) and (g)
of title 49, U.S. Code (U.S.C.), subtitle I, establish the FAA
Administrator's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle
VII of title 49, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope
of the agency's authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides that the
Administrator shall consider in the public interest, among other
matters, assigning, maintaining, and enhancing safety and security as
the highest priorities in air commerce. Section 40105(b)(1)(A) requires
the Administrator to exercise this authority consistently with the
obligations of the U.S. Government under international agreements.
The FAA is promulgating this rule under the authority described in
49 U.S.C. 44701, General requirements. Under that section, the FAA is
charged broadly with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air
commerce by prescribing, among other things, regulations and minimum
standards for practices, methods, and procedures that the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce and national security. This
regulation is within the scope of the FAA's authority because it
provides relief to U.S. civil aviation operators and airmen conducting
transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on jet routes P500-G500,
permitting those persons to operate at altitudes at and above FL300,
instead of at altitudes at and above FL320, as is required for
operations conducted in the rest of the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption
Section 553(b)(B) of title 5, U.S. Code, authorizes agencies to
dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when the agency
for ``good cause'' finds that those procedures are ``impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Also, section 553(d)
permits agencies, upon a finding of good cause, to issue rules with an
effective date less than 30 days from the date of publication. In this
instance, the FAA finds good cause to forgo notice and comment and the
delayed effective date because they would be impracticable and contrary
to the public interest.
Providing notice and the opportunity for the public to comment here
would be impracticable. The FAA's flight prohibitions, and any
amendments thereto, need to include appropriate boundaries that reflect
the agency's current understanding of the risk environment for U.S.
civil aviation. This allows the FAA to protect the safety of U.S.
operators' aircraft and the lives of their passengers and crews without
over-restricting or under-restricting U.S. operators' routing options.
However, the risk environment for U.S. civil aviation in airspace
managed by other countries with respect to safety of flight is fluid in
circumstances involving fighting, violent extremist and militant
activity, or periods of heightened tensions, particularly where weapons
capable of targeting or otherwise negatively affecting U.S. civil
aviation are or may be present. This fluidity, and the potential for
rapid changes in the risks to U.S. civil aviation, significantly limits
how far in advance of a new or amended flight prohibition the FAA can
usefully assess the risk environment. The delay that would be
occasioned by providing an opportunity to comment on this action would
significantly increase the risk that the resulting final action would
not accurately reflect the current risks to U.S. civil aviation
associated with the situation and thus would not establish boundaries
for the flight prohibition commensurate with those risks.
While the FAA sought and responded to public comments, the
boundaries of the area in which unacceptable risks to the safety of
U.S. civil aviation existed might change due to: evolving military or
political circumstances; violent extremist and militant group activity;
the introduction, removal, or repositioning of more advanced anti-
aircraft weapon systems; or other factors. As a result, if the
situation improved while the FAA sought and responded to public
comments, the rule the FAA finalized might be over-restrictive,
unnecessarily limiting U.S. operators' routing options and potentially
causing them to incur unnecessary additional fuel and operations-
related costs, as well as potentially causing passengers to incur
unnecessarily some costs attributed to their time. Conversely, if the
situation deteriorated while the FAA sought and responded to public
comments, the rule the FAA finalized might be under-restrictive,
allowing U.S. civil aviation to continue operating in areas where
unacceptable risks to their safety had developed. Such an outcome would
endanger the safety of these aircraft, as well as their passengers and
crews, exposing them to unacceptable risks of death, injury, and
property damage that could occur if a U.S. operator's aircraft were
shot down (or otherwise damaged) while operating in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX).
Alternatively, if the FAA made changes to the area in which U.S.
civil aviation operations would be prohibited between a notice of
proposed rulemaking and a final rule due to changed conditions, the
version of the rule the public commented on would no longer reflect the
FAA's current assessment of the risk environment for U.S. civil
aviation.
In addition, seeking comment would be contrary to the public
interest because some of the rational basis for the rulemaking is based
upon classified information and controlled unclassified information not
authorized for public release. In order to meaningfully provide comment
on a proposal, the public would need access to the basis for the
agency's decision-making, which the FAA cannot provide. Disclosing
classified or controlled unclassified information in order to seek
meaningful comment on the proposal would harm the public interest.
Accordingly, the FAA meaningfully seeking comment on the proposal is
contrary to the public interest.
Therefore, providing notice and the opportunity for comment would
be impracticable as it would hinder the FAA's ability to maintain
appropriate flight prohibitions based on up-to-date assessments of the
risks to the safety of U.S. civil aviation operations in airspace
managed by other countries and contrary to the public interest as the
FAA cannot protect classified and controlled unclassified information
and meaningfully seek public comment.
For the same reasons discussed above, the potential safety impacts
and the need for prompt action on up-to-date information that is not
public would make delaying the effective date impracticable and
contrary to the public
[[Page 55502]]
interest. Additionally, for transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) on jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300, any
delay in the effective date of the rule would continue a prohibition on
U.S. civil aviation operations on these jet routes at altitudes at and
above FL300 that the FAA has determined is no longer needed for the
safety of U.S. civil aviation and would thus unnecessarily restrict
U.S. operators' routing options at those altitudes on those jet routes.
Accordingly, the FAA finds good cause exists to forgo notice and
comment and any delay in the effective date for this rule.
III. Background and Discussion of the Final Rule
On August 30, 2021, the FAA issued NOTAM KICZ A0029/21 to address
the then-existing unacceptable risks to the safety of U.S. civil
aviation operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at all altitudes, except
for transiting overflight operations on jet routes P500-G500. This
NOTAM prohibited, with certain limited exceptions, U.S. civil aviation
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at all altitudes by all: U.S. air
carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges
of an airman certificate issued by the FAA, except when such persons
are operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
all operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when the
operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier, due to the risk
posed by violent extremist and militant activity, lack of adequate risk
mitigation capabilities, and disruption to air traffic services. The
NOTAM allowed U.S. civil aviation overflights to transit the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) on jet routes P500-G500, as such operations are only in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) very briefly.
Following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, the International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Asia-Pacific Office made contact
with Afghanistan's civil aviation authority and stood up a contingency
coordination team (CCT) composed of Afghanistan and neighboring air
navigation service providers, as well as International Air Transport
Association (IATA) representation. Afghanistan's civil aviation
authority and the CCT worked with neighboring air navigation service
providers to establish a contingency plan for the safe resumption of
civil overflights in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
Subsequently, Afghanistan issued a series of NOTAMs delineating
overflight procedures and established altitude blocks for specific
categories of flight operations across various regions. The overflight
procedures rely upon internationally-recognized traffic information
broadcasts by aircraft (TIBA) procedures, which pilots use in areas
around the world where air traffic services are very limited or
unavailable to maintain safe separation between aircraft. Consequently,
the FAA determined that U.S. civil aviation operations throughout the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) could resume at altitudes at and above FL320 due to
diminished risks to U.S. civil aviation operations at those altitudes.
On July 25, 2023, the FAA published in the Federal Register a final
rule, Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX), allowing U.S. civil overflights of the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) to resume at altitudes at and above FL320.\1\ However,
as described in more detail in the preamble to the July 2023 final
rule, the FAA continued to assess the situation in the Kabul FIR (OAKX)
at altitudes below FL320 as being hazardous for U.S. civil aviation and
prohibited U.S. civil aviation operations at those altitudes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) final rule, 88 FR 47765 (Jul. 25,
2023). The FAA had prohibited U.S. civil flight operations at all
altitudes in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) in NOTAM KICZ A0029/21, except for
transiting overflights on jet routes P500-G500. With the publication
of the July 2023 final rule, the FAA rescinded NOTAM KICZ A0029/21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the FAA did not identify or assess that there existed any
increased safety-of-flight risks to transiting U.S. civil aviation
overflights operating on jet routes P500-G500 due to violent extremist
or militant activity, the FAA prohibited operations on those routes at
altitudes below FL320 in the July 2023 final rule because the Kabul FIR
Air Traffic Management Contingency Plan indicates that, as necessary,
FL300 may be reserved for military operations by NOTAM. Consequently,
the FAA decided to establish a minimum allowed overflight level of
FL320 for U.S. civil aviation operations in the entirety of the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) to help ensure aircraft separation between any military
operations being conducted in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at FL300 and U.S.
civil aviation overflights.
Since it issued the July 2023 final rule, the FAA has received two
petitions for exemption from SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, from U.S. air
carriers requesting to operate on jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at
and above FL300 instead of at altitudes at and above FL320 as required
by SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, due to aircraft performance issues
under certain meteorological conditions.2 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ American Airlines, docket FAA-2023-1985.
\3\ United Parcel Service, Co., docket FAA-2023-2065.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the publication of the Kabul FIR Air Traffic Management
Contingency Plan and continuing since the FAA issued the July 2023
final rule, Afghanistan has issued a series of NOTAMs permitting
overflight operations between waypoints FIRUZ and MOTMO on jet routes
P500-G500 at altitudes between FL300-FL510. The FAA is not aware of any
safety or security incidents experienced by civil aircraft operating on
jet routes P500-G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at or above
FL300 due to military flight operations while FAA NOTAM KICZ A0029/21,
which permitted U.S. civil aviation operations on that route, was in
effect or since the July 2023 final rule. In addition, the FAA is not
aware of any active threats to U.S. civil aviation operations on jet
routes P500-G500 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) from violent extremist and
militant activity and is not aware of any reports of security incidents
involving violent extremist and militant activity posing safety-of-
flight risks to civil aircraft overflights using these jet routes at
altitudes at or above FL300 in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), either while FAA
NOTAM KICZ A0029/21 was in effect or since the issuance of the July
2023 final rule. The very limited flight time in the Kabul FIR (OAKX)
minimizes both potential exposure to any military operations in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) that might be operating at FL300 and to potential
opportunistic threats should a violent extremist observe or hear an
overflying aircraft. Specifically, the flight distance between
waypoints FIRUZ and MOTMO on jet routes P500-G500 is approximately 12
nautical miles, which takes approximately 95 seconds at cruising
speeds.
Consequently, the FAA has determined that U.S. civil aviation
overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and above FL300 on
jet routes P500-G500 present a low risk. Although violent extremists
and militants have access to weapons posing risks up to 25,000 feet,
and there is high terrain in the vicinity of jet routes P500-G500, the
FAA did not see such weapons used against civil aviation overflights on
these jet routes during approximately 20 years of U.S. military
presence in Afghanistan or since the coalition withdrawal in August of
2021.
Therefore, consistent with the foregoing, the FAA is amending SFAR
No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, to permit U.S. civil
[[Page 55503]]
aviation to conduct transiting overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) on
jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300, subject to the
approval of, and in accordance with the conditions established by, the
appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
However, this final rule continues to prohibit U.S. civil flight
operations at altitudes below FL320 throughout the rest of the Kabul
FIR (OAKX). Violent extremist and militant activities continue to pose
safety-of-flight risks to U.S. civil aviation at altitudes below FL320
throughout the rest of Afghanistan. Violent extremists and militants
are primarily armed with small arms, crew-served weapons, and field
rockets and may have access to legacy man-portable air defense systems
(MANPADS). Some MANPADS may be capable of reaching a maximum altitude
of up to 25,000 feet above ground level; however, in the context of
Afghanistan, the FAA must also account for the high altitude of some of
the country's terrain. Allowing U.S. civil aviation operations in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) only at altitudes at or above FL320, other than on jet
routes P500-G500, accounts for risks associated with the capabilities
of weapons systems potentially available to violent extremist
organizations and the terrain under other established international air
routes in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As defined in 14 CFR 1.1, ``Flight level means a level of
constant atmospheric pressure related to a reference datum of 29.92
inches of mercury.'' Flight level, in this context, is
differentiated from above-ground-level (AGL), which is altitude
expressed in feet measured above ground level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further amendments to SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, might be
appropriate if the risk to U.S. civil aviation safety and security
changes. In this regard, the FAA will continue to monitor the situation
and evaluate the extent to which persons described in paragraph (a) of
this rule might be able to operate safely in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
The FAA also republishes the details concerning the approval and
exemption processes in sections V and VI of this preamble, consistent
with other recently published flight prohibition SFARs to enable
interested persons to refer to this final rule for comprehensive
information about requesting relief from the FAA from the provisions of
SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619.
V. Approval Process Based on a Request From a Department, Agency, or
Instrumentality of the United States Government
A. Approval Process Based on an Authorization Request From a
Department, Agency, or Instrumentality of the United States Government
In some instances, U.S. Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities may need to engage U.S. civil aviation to support
their activities in the Kabul FIR (OAKX). If a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S. Government determines that it has a
critical need to engage any person described in paragraph (a) of SFAR
No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, including a U.S. air carrier or commercial
operator, to transport civilian or military passengers or cargo or
conduct other operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), except for transiting
overflights on jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300,
that department, agency, or instrumentality may request the FAA to
approve persons described in paragraph (a) of SFAR No. 119, Sec.
91.1619, to conduct such operations.
The requesting U.S. Government department, agency, or
instrumentality must submit the request for approval to the FAA's
Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety in a letter signed by an
appropriate senior official of the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality.\5\ The FAA will not accept or consider requests for
approval from anyone other than the requesting U.S. Government
department, agency, or instrumentality. In addition, the senior
official signing the letter requesting FAA approval must be
sufficiently positioned within the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality to demonstrate that the organization's senior
leadership supports the request for approval and is committed to taking
all necessary steps to minimize aviation safety and security risks to
the proposed flights. The senior official must also be in a position
to: (1) attest to the accuracy of all representations made to the FAA
in the request for approval, and (2) ensure that any support from the
requesting U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality
described in the request for approval is in fact brought to bear and is
maintained over time. Unless justified by exigent circumstances,
requesting U.S. Government departments, agencies, or instrumentalities
must submit requests for approval to the FAA no less than 30 calendar
days before the date on which the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality wishes the operator(s) to commence the proposed
operation(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ This approval procedure applies to U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or instrumentalities; it does not apply to
the public. The FAA describes this procedure in the interest of
providing transparency with respect to the FAA's process for
interacting with U.S. Government departments, agencies, or
instrumentalities that seek to engage U.S. civil aviation to operate
in the area in which this SFAR would prohibit their operations in
the absence of specific FAA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requestor must send the request to the Associate Administrator
for Aviation Safety, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591. Electronic submissions are acceptable,
and the requesting entity may request that the FAA notify it
electronically as to whether the FAA grants the request for approval.
If a requestor wishes to make an electronic submission to the FAA, the
requestor should contact the Washington Operations Center by telephone
at (202) 267-3203 or by email at [email protected] for submission instructions. The
requestor must not submit its letter requesting FAA approval or related
supporting documentation to the Washington Operations Center. Rather,
the Washington Operations Center will refer the requestor to an
appropriate staff member of the Flight Standards Service for further
assistance.
A single letter may request approval from the FAA for multiple
persons described in SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619, or for multiple
flight operations. To the extent known, the letter must identify the
person(s) the requester expects the SFAR to cover on whose behalf the
U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality seeks FAA
approval, and it must describe--
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the
mission being supported;
The service the person(s) covered by the SFAR will
provide;
To the extent known, the specific locations in the Kabul
FIR (OAKX) where the proposed operation(s) will occur, including, but
not limited to, the flight path and altitude of the aircraft while it
is operating in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) and the airports, airfields, or
landing zones at which the aircraft will take off and land; and
The method by which the requesting department, agency, or
instrumentality will provide, or how the operator will otherwise
obtain, current threat information and an explanation of how the
operator will integrate this information into all phases of the
proposed operations (i.e., the pre-mission planning and briefing, in-
flight, and post-flight phases).
The request for approval must also include a list of operators with
whom
[[Page 55504]]
the U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality requesting
FAA approval has a current contract(s), grant(s), or cooperative
agreement(s) (or its prime contractor has a subcontract(s)) for
specific flight operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), except for
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) limited to transiting overflights on
jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300. The requestor may
identify additional operators to the FAA at any time after the FAA
issues its approval. Neither the operators listed in the original
request, nor any operators the requestor subsequently seeks to add to
the approval, may commence operations under the approval until the FAA
issues them an Operations Specification (OpSpec) or Letter of
Authorization (LOA), as appropriate, for operations in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) at altitudes below FL320 and/or at altitudes below FL300 on jet
routes P500-G500, as applicable. The approval conditions discussed
below apply to all operators. Requestors should contact the Washington
Operations Center by telephone at (202) 267-3203 or by email at [email protected] for instructions on how to submit
the names of additional operators the requestor wishes to add to an
existing approval to the FAA. The requestor must not submit the names
of additional operators it wishes to add to an existing approval to the
Washington Operations Center. Rather, the Washington Operations Center
will refer the requestor to an appropriate staff member of the Flight
Standards Service for further assistance.
If an approval request includes classified information or
controlled unclassified information not authorized for public release,
requestors may contact the Washington Operations Center for
instructions on submitting it to the FAA. The Washington Operations
Center's contact information appears in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this final rule.
FAA approval of an operation under SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619,
does not relieve persons subject to this SFAR of the responsibility to
comply with all other applicable FAA rules and regulations. Operators
of civil aircraft must comply with the conditions of their
certificates, OpSpecs, and LOAs, as applicable. Operators must also
comply with all rules and regulations of other U.S. Government
departments, agencies, or instrumentalities that may apply to the
proposed operation(s), including, but not limited to, regulations
issued by the Transportation Security Administration.
B. Approval Conditions
If the FAA approves the request, the FAA's Aviation Safety
organization will send an approval letter to the requesting U.S.
Government department, agency, or instrumentality informing it that the
FAA's approval is subject to all of the following conditions:
(1) The approval will stipulate those procedures and conditions
that limit, to the greatest degree possible, the risk to the operator
while still allowing the operator to achieve its operational
objectives.
(2) Before any approval takes effect, the operator must submit to
the FAA:
(a) A written release of the U.S. Government from all damages,
claims, and liabilities, including without limitation legal fees and
expenses, relating to any event arising out of or related to the
approved operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX); and
(b) The operator's written agreement to indemnify the U.S.
Government with respect to any and all third-party damages, claims, and
liabilities, including without limitation legal fees and expenses,
relating to any event arising out of or related to the approved
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
(3) Other conditions the FAA may specify, including those the FAA
might impose in OpSpecs or LOAs, as applicable.
The release and agreement to indemnify do not preclude an operator
from raising a claim under an applicable non-premium war risk insurance
policy the FAA issues under chapter 443 of title 49, U.S. Code.
If the FAA approves the proposed operation(s), the FAA will issue
an OpSpec or LOA, as applicable, to the operator(s) identified in the
original request and any operators the requestor subsequently adds to
the approval, authorizing them to conduct the approved operation(s). In
addition, as stated in paragraph (3) of this section V.B., the FAA
notes that it may include additional conditions beyond those contained
in the approval letter in any OpSpec or LOA associated with a
particular operator operating under this approval, as necessary in the
interests of aviation safety. U.S. Government departments, agencies,
and instrumentalities requesting FAA approval on behalf of entities
with which they have a contract or subcontract, grant, or cooperative
agreement should request a copy of the relevant OpSpec or LOA directly
from the entity with which they have any of the foregoing types of
arrangements, if desired.
VI. Information Regarding Petitions for Exemption
Any operations not conducted under an approval the FAA issues
through the approval process set forth previously may only occur in
accordance with an exemption from SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619. A
petition for exemption must comply with 14 CFR part 11. The FAA will
consider whether exceptional circumstances exist beyond those described
in the approval process in the previous section. To determine whether a
petition for exemption from the prohibition this SFAR establishes
fulfills the standards described in 14 CFR 11.81, the FAA consistently
finds necessary the following information:
The proposed operation(s), including the nature of the
operation;
The service the person(s) covered by the SFAR will
provide;
The specific locations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) where the
proposed operation(s) will occur, including, but not limited to, the
flight path and altitude of the aircraft while it is operating in the
Kabul FIR (OAKX) and the airports, airfields, or landing zones at which
the aircraft will take off and land;
The method by which the operator will obtain current
threat information and an explanation of how the operator will
integrate this information into all phases of its proposed operations
(i.e., the pre-mission planning and briefing, in-flight, and post-
flight phases); and
The plans and procedures the operator will use to minimize
the risks identified in this preamble to the proposed operations, to
support the relief sought, and demonstrate that granting such relief
would not adversely affect safety or would provide a level of safety at
least equal to that provided by this SFAR. The FAA has found
comprehensive, organized plans and procedures of this nature to be
helpful in facilitating the agency's safety evaluation of petitions for
exemption from flight prohibition SFARs.
The FAA includes, as a condition of each such exemption it issues,
a release and agreement to indemnify, as described previously.
The FAA recognizes that, with the support of the U.S. Government,
the governments of other countries could plan operations that may be
affected by SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619. While the FAA will not permit
these operations through the approval process, the FAA will consider
exemption requests for such operations on an expedited basis and in
accordance with the order of preference set forth in paragraph (c) of
SFAR No. 119, Sec. 91.1619.
[[Page 55505]]
If a petition for exemption includes information that is sensitive
for security reasons or proprietary information, requestors may contact
the Washington Operations Center for instructions on submitting it to
the FAA. The Washington Operations Center's contact information is
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this final
rule. Requestors must not submit their petitions for exemption or
related supporting documentation to the Washington Operations Center.
Rather, the Washington Operations Center will refer the requestor to
the appropriate staff member of the Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service, or the Office of Rulemaking for further assistance.
VII. Severability
Congress authorized the FAA by statute to promote safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, among other things,
regulations and minimum standards for practices, methods, and
procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce
and national security. 49 U.S.C. 44701. Consistent with that mandate,
the FAA is prohibiting certain persons from conducting flight
operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX) below certain altitudes due to the
continuing hazards to the safety of U.S. civil flight operations at
those altitudes. The purpose of this rule is to operate holistically in
addressing a range of hazards and needs in the Kabul FIR (OAKX).
However, the FAA recognizes that certain provisions focus on unique
factors. Therefore, the FAA finds that the various provisions of this
final rule are severable and able to operate functionally if severed
from each other. In the event a court were to invalidate one or more of
this final rule's unique provisions, the remaining provisions should
stand, thus allowing the FAA to continue to fulfill its Congressionally
authorized role of promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air
commerce.
VIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of Executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, as amended by Executive Order 14094
(``Modernizing Regulatory Review''), direct that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354), as codified in
5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires agencies to analyze the economic impact
of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements
Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as codified in 19 U.S.C. chapter 13,
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing
U.S. standards, the Trade Agreements Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. chapter 25, requires agencies
to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other
effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of
the economic impacts of this final rule.
In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined this final
rule has benefits that justify its costs. This rule is a significant
regulatory action, as defined in section 3(f)(4) of Executive Order
12866 as amended by Executive Order 14094. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not
require notice and comment for this final rule, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604 do
not require regulatory flexibility analyses regarding impacts on small
entities. This rule will not create unnecessary obstacles to the
foreign commerce of the United States. This rule will not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments, or on the
private sector, by exceeding the threshold identified previously.
A. Regulatory Evaluation
This rule continues to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) at altitudes below FL320, except for transiting overflights on
jet routes P500-G500, due to the significant hazards to U.S. civil
aviation described in this preamble. The alternative flight routes
result in some additional fuel and operations costs to the affected
operators, as well as some costs attributed to passenger time. However,
this amendment of the SFAR provides relief to U.S. civil operators and
airmen wishing to conduct transiting overflight operations on jet
routes P500-G500 at altitudes at and above FL300, instead of requiring
them to operate at altitudes at and above FL320, as the SFAR previously
did.
For the reasons described in the Background and Discussion of the
Final Rule section of this preamble, the FAA has determined that U.S.
civil aviation overflights of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes at and
above FL300 on jet routes P500-G500 present a low risk and that U.S.
operators and airmen may conduct such flights. However, as described in
more detail in the Background and Discussion of the Final Rule section
of this preamble, the FAA has also determined that U.S. civil aviation
operations in the remainder of the Kabul FIR (OAKX) at altitudes below
FL320 continue to pose unacceptable risks to the safety of U.S. civil
aviation due to the risks to such operations posed by violent extremist
and militant activity and the lack of adequate risk mitigation
capabilities to counter such activity. The rule allows for a lower
minimum flight level of FL300 on jet routes P500-G500, providing relief
and reducing the cost for overflights transiting P500-G500 while
continuing to prohibit unsafe flights in the remainder of the Kabul FIR
(OAKX) at altitudes below FL320.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), in 5 U.S.C. 603, requires an
agency to prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis describing
impacts on small entities whenever 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law
requires an agency to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking
for any proposed rule. Similarly, 5 U.S.C. 604 requires an agency to
prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis when an agency issues a
final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553 after that section or any other law
requires publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking. The
FAA concludes good cause exists to forgo notice and comment and to not
delay the effective date for this rule. As 5 U.S.C. 553 does not
require notice and comment in this situation, 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604
similarly do not require regulatory flexibility analyses.
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to this Act, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
[[Page 55506]]
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that its purpose is to protect the safety of U.S. civil
aviation from risks to their operations in the Kabul FIR (OAKX), a
location outside the U.S. Therefore, the rule complies with the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $183 million in lieu of $100
million.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the
requirements of title II of the Act do not apply.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
the FAA to consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens it imposes on the public. The FAA has determined no
new requirement for information collection is associated with this
final rule.
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, the FAA's policy is to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices correspond to
this regulation. The FAA finds this action is fully consistent with the
obligations under 49 U.S.C. 40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure the FAA exercises
its duties consistently with the obligations of the United States under
international agreements.
While the FAA's flight prohibition does not apply to foreign air
carriers, DOT codeshare authorizations prohibit foreign air carriers
from carrying a U.S. codeshare partner's code on a flight segment that
operates in airspace for which the FAA has issued a flight prohibition
for U.S. civil aviation. In addition, foreign air carriers and other
foreign operators may choose to avoid, or be advised or directed by
their civil aviation authorities to avoid, airspace for which the FAA
has issued a flight prohibition for U.S. civil aviation.
G. Environmental Analysis
The FAA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 12114,
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, and DOT Order
5610.1C, Paragraph 16. Executive Order 12114 requires the FAA to be
informed of environmental considerations and take those considerations
into account when making decisions on major Federal actions that could
have environmental impacts anywhere beyond the borders of the United
States. The FAA has determined this action is exempt pursuant to
section 2-5(a)(i) of Executive Order 12114 because it does not have the
potential for a significant effect on the environment outside the
United States.
In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 8-6(c), the FAA has prepared a
memorandum for the record stating the reason(s) for this determination
and has placed it in the docket for this rulemaking.
IX. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this rule under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132. The agency has determined this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the relationship
between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Therefore, this rule will not have federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211. The agency
has determined it is not a ``significant energy action'' under the
Executive order and will not be likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
Executive Order 13609 promotes international regulatory cooperation
to meet shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609 and has determined that this action will have no
effect on international regulatory cooperation.
X. Additional Information
A. Electronic Access
Except for classified and controlled unclassified material not
authorized for public release, all documents the FAA considered in
developing this rule, including economic analyses and technical
reports, may be accessed from the internet through the docket for this
rulemaking.
Those documents may be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov
using the docket number listed above. A copy of this rule will be
placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are
available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register's website at https://www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website
at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also be found at the FAA's
Regulations and Policies website at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677.
B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104-121) (set forth as a note to 5 U.S.C. 601)
requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information or
advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its
jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this document may
contact its local FAA official or the persons listed under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble.
To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91
Afghanistan, Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports,
Aviation safety, Freight.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
[[Page 55507]]
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 40103, 40105, 40113,
40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715,
44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122,
47508, 47528-47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C.
44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
0
2. Amend Sec. 91.1619 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1619 Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 119--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights in the Kabul Flight Information Region (FIR)
(OAKX).
* * * * *
(c) Permitted operations. This section does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations in the Kabul Flight Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) under
the following circumstances:
(1) Permitted operations that do not require an approval or
exemption from the FAA. (i) Overflights of the Kabul Flight Information
Region (FIR) (OAKX) may be conducted at altitudes at and above Flight
Level (FL) 320, subject to the approval of, and in accordance with the
conditions established by, the appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
(ii) Transiting overflights of the Kabul Flight Information Region
(FIR) (OAKX) may be conducted on jet routes P500-G500 at altitudes at
and above FL300, subject to the approval of, and in accordance with the
conditions established by, the appropriate authorities of Afghanistan.
(2) Operations permitted under an approval or exemption issued by
the FAA. Flight operations may be conducted in the Kabul Flight
Information Region (FIR) (OAKX) at altitudes below FL320, provided that
such flight operations occur under a contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement with a department, agency, or instrumentality of the U.S.
Government (or under a subcontract between the prime contractor of the
U.S. Government department, agency, or instrumentality and the person
described in paragraph (a) of this section) with the approval of the
FAA or under an exemption issued by the FAA. The FAA will consider
requests for approval or exemption in a timely manner, with the order
of preference being: first, for those operations in support of U.S.
Government-sponsored activities; second, for those operations in
support of government-sponsored activities of a foreign country with
the support of a U.S. Government department, agency, or
instrumentality; and third, for all other operations.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, under the authority of 49 U.S.C.
106(f) and (g), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5).
Michael Gordon Whitaker,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-14708 Filed 7-3-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P